Ya Snarfy, that`s what I don`t understand. In a nation on the brink of legalizing, why are so many trouble making drug dealers provoking a backlash? Was that a rhetorical question?

"For anyone interested, here`s the link to the thread where DML is called out for exploitating the poor and disabled."

And, again, for the second time (I will keep counting if you continue to play this game) here is the link from the second page of that thread where I address all the concerns brought up:


http://www.marijuana.com/legalization-decriminalization/23507-rallies-2.html





"I found it interesting that DML only lasted 7 posts there."

Whoa. Just one page back in this thread you accused me of spending TOO MUCH TIME there! Do you even read your own posts?:

"Frankly, I think you spent way too much time trying to defend yourself at that site. False accusations do not warrant that much effort."

So which is it? Too much time there or not enough time there?





"A drug dealer advocating for legalization is a friggin` oxymoron."

Ben Dronkers. Tom Forcade. Rosie Rowbotham. Dennis Peron. The Holy Smoke activists. Da Kine. The list goes on and on ... Some of the most effective activists have been drug dealers.



"Marc`s drug dealing creates a schism, ..."

Marc's SEED dealing brought thousands of people together and helped to launch repeated challenges to the law that were all more effective in pressuring our government and courts to do things than both the LeDain Comission or the Senate Report.

Marc created a center for every type of cannabis media known to human kind and a few that were innovated by his team including the forum you're taking advantage of right now.

The people who have opened the Harm Reduction Club, the BCCCS, Sacred Herb, the Urban Shaman, the Herb School, the Seed Bank, the Herb Museum, and countless other places all worked with or for Marc in the past.





"...then live with your blot;"

What blot?

Whatever I am, at least I'm not an internet troll.








"...don`t go blaming Canada, conservatives, the USA OR ANYTHING ELSE FOR THE BLOT YOU BROUGHT UPON SO MANY OTHERS!"

Who in here using their real name is complaining to you about me putting a blot on them? If they exist at all, what is the substance of their arguments against me?

The "you once knew and - to a limited extent - worked with a guy who was later accused of pedophilia" accusation falls flat as there were a dozen other people in the community who fit into that category as well and they're not being accused of anything.







"Now, activate that God Damned ignore button!!!"

Never. I will be here with the truth - every time - until you wake up to the monster you have become.

Sooner or later, monsters get REALLY bad luck.

"Because the lowlife sonofabitch more often than not ends up on welfare, then has the gall to say he believes he`s working."

I went on welfare once in my life. For six months. AFTER THE JOB I HAD CREATED FOR MYSELF (and that employed many others too) was taken away from me without reason.

All the dealers I know don't take welfare unless their arrests completely take them out of the action - and most of the busted still manage to avoid it if they can.

And one more point. Doing research, writing good articles and creating and operating a museum IS work. You should try it sometime and see how much actual work is involved to do it properly.

"In a nation on the brink of legalizing, why are so many trouble making drug dealers provoking a backlash?"

On the brink of legalizing? Where do you get that?

"To run away from danger, instead of facing it, is to deny one's faith in
man and God, even one's own self. It were better for one to drown oneself
than live to declare such bankruptcy of faith."
- Mahatma Gandhi

Well, ya proved to my satisfaction that you`re a communist drug dealer more interested in exploitation than reforms. Sheeeeiiit! If reform happened, you`d be S.O.L.; MOST PEOPLE CAN FIGURE THAT ONE OUT

DMLX4

"Well, ya proved to my satisfaction that you`re a communist..."

Anarchists are the first anti-communists. You live in a fact free world.





"...drug dealer..."

And PROUD of it, too.




"...more interested in exploitation than reforms."

Exploitation? I'm an anarchist and a libertarian socialist - and I define socialism as "freedom from exploitation". Again, you provide no examples of me exploiting anyone. You live in a fact-free world.











"Sheeeeiiit! If reform happened, you`d be S.O.L.;"

I'd be a cannabis dealer like the ones in Holland. Not quite as wealthy as a big pharma medicine monopolist, but wealthy none the less. And I'd have lots of free time to solve other global problems.

First you talk about drug dealers like it's a bad thing, and the next moment you talk about drug peace like there's no benefit. You need to go to Holland and see what drug peace looks like close up - the drug dealers there do QUITE well for themselves.












"MOST PEOPLE CAN FIGURE THAT ONE OUT"

I believe most people have you figured out, too.

What other conclusions can someone arrive at what with your stupid Nazi hunting and your worship of a known sympathizer of communist regimes? As to the drug dealing? Why in the Hell would a DESV drug dealer really want drugs legalized?

You started this thread with a lead topic a little too close to your own ideology for you to keep going on for too much longer; you`ll end up stuck to the tar baby

Tony Snow and the Tar Baby of "Offensensibility"


A classic "Bloom County" cartoon of the 1980s has Opus the penguin sitting on a park bench watching a host of people pointing out things about each other that they find offensive, till they all realize, "Life is offensive!" At which point they all run off screaming in horror. Opus sums up the spectacle thus: "Offensensibility."

Offensensibility is something afflicting many in our society, and it's an especially volatile combination with cultural illiteracy. Just ask new White House Press Secretary Tony Snow. His first outing went well by many accounts; however, one thing he said set off the easily tripped alarms of the race-baiters of the American left. Snow was responding to a question about the surveillance issue, and he said:

"I don't want to hug the tar baby of trying to comment on the program — the alleged program — the existence of which I can neither confirm nor deny."

The race-baiters immediately set to work pretending to be outraged about Snow's use of the phrase "tar baby" and hoping it would, well, tar the White House with imputed racism. One group fortunate enough to be listed by Google News, styling itself "Think Progress" (they apparently left off "While Wishing to Oppress"), provides an excellent example of the attempt to gin up controversy; the comments are exemplary.

The problems with this issue are many:

One: The figure of the tar baby comes from American lore, as Snow even pointed out to one particularly ignorant press member who asked him to "put into English the phrase, 'hug the tar baby.'" In point of fact, it hails from African-American lore, the famous Brer Rabbit tales from which we've also kept "Don't throw me in that briar patch!" They're wonderful tales that impart object lessons with good humor and memorable imagery.

The tar baby was a trap devised by Brer Fox to catch Brer Rabbit, and once the rabbit got his paws on the tar baby, he was stuck. It was made of exceptionally sticky pitch, so the more Brer Rabbit tried to extricate himself from it, the more stuck in it he became. The tar baby became an apt metaphor for a situation that you can't get yourself out of once you get involved in it; the lesson is, don't get involved in it at all, stay away.

Two: Snow used the "tar baby" imagery explicitly with that object lesson in mind. Even if certain people have used the phrase "tar baby" as a racial slur, Snow certainly was not and should not be held accountable for others' misuse of a term that he knew well and used in the proper context. In this sense the "tar baby" issue is just like the "niggardly" controversies (a "Think Progress" poster made this point, although of course to mean Snow was just as "racist" as the persons who said "niggardly") in which people who used words in their proper contexts are punished for having small-minded ignoramuses in their audiences who didn't know those words and couldn't think of anything better than to misconstrue them in a racial context.

Three: By using African-American lore in a White House press corps briefing and expecting, however wrong he was, that the press would recognize it, Snow is legitimizing it — well, it is already legimitate; I mean signaling that it is legitimate Americana, suggesting it is something all Americans should know, recognizing its cultural importance. That is 180 degrees removed from the racist tinge the race-baiters wish to give it.

Four: Tony Snow has used this imagery before, as have numerous other opinion writers. Google the terms "Iraq" and "tar baby," for instance; you'll find the proper, contextual use of the phrase spanning the range of American political opinion (over 53,000 hits, too).

Five: Finally, doesn't it seem a rather small-minded, racist way of thinking to equate "tar baby" with a smear against blacks since tar is, you know, so black? That's as stupid as suggesting the term "sugar daddy" ought to be regarded a smear against whites, since refined sugar is so white.

"What other conclusions can someone arrive at what with your stupid Nazi hunting..."

You could arrive at the conclusion that I am anti-Nazi. You could also call me anti-corporate, too. And you could bother to learn the difference between an anarchist and a communist.





"...and your worship of a known sympathizer of communist regimes?"

1) Show me where I do more than agree with Chomsky on many things. I've stated where I disagree with Chomsky - if I can disagree with him how is that "worship"?

2) Show me where Chomsky has done more than smile at Castro. Chomsky calls Castro a tyrant and has written more than one anti-Communist article:

http://www.chomsky.info/articles/1986----.htm

http://www.chomsky.info/articles/198912--.htm










"As to the drug dealing? Why in the Hell would a DESV drug dealer really want drugs legalized?"

Because

1) they can make more money in a legal market and

2) not have to worry about getting shot or put into jail.










"You started this thread with a lead topic a little too close to your own ideology ..."

Still waiting to see an example of my communist-esque manifesto. You haven't provided one pro-authoritarian socialist position of mine. Not one example.

I think you're hoping that some of the lies you spew will stick if you repeat them often enough. It's a good thing that the forums allow for a higher standard of evidence than simple accusations.

OK brainiac so I can buy cigarettes from natives for 1.50 a pack but the same ones through government grief cost 10 bucks a pack.........are you completely fucked thinking that gov involvement will make things better for you or me? You are wrong about everything! but I should'nt be surprised because far left commies like you are usually wrong about everything
For one an asshole like you wont be allowed to be involved in any gov controlled anything, you are just going to fuck yourself there. Actually I cant think of anyone who is doing more damage to the legalization cause than you

It`s not communism anymore, it`s anarcosomeotherbullshit to keepfromcallingitcommunism, remember?

Roots in leftism
AF’s real roots are not in left communism, or even partially in it, but in leftism, the radical wing of the capitalist left. They describe it themselves in an earlier history of the origins of their organisation. (Organise! No. 42, Spring 1996). They emerged from the debacle of the various anarchist communist organisations of the 1970s, who entered almost en masse into Trotskyist groups. In 1974 most of the Organisation of Revolutionary Anarchists "ended up in the horrific authoritarian Healyite outfit, the Workers Revolutionary Party, whilst others joined IS (the precursor of the Socialist Workers Party)" (p17).

The remains of the ORA then formed the Anarchist Workers Association in 1975, but in 1977 an overtly leftist tendency expelled the others and reformed as the Libertarian Communist Group which later entered an electoral front with the Trotskyist International Marxist Group called Socialist Unity. The latter put forward the slogan: ‘Vote Labour, but Build a Socialist Alternative’. Eventually the LCG fused with another leftist group Big Flame in 1980, which dissolved when its members entered the Labour Party. The AF was formed from veterans of the ORA/AWA/LCG and a split from the SWP that produced the magazine ‘Virus’.

The degree to which the AF has broken with its leftist past can be measured by their position on the trade unions that is virtually indistinguishable from the typical leftist approach.

The degree to which it really adheres to left communist traditions, and the sincerity of its motives for claiming to do so, can be understood by its implacable hostility to left communist organisations. In the case of the ICC, for example, the ACF once wrote to us to say that we were not ‘welcome’ at their meetings. So while they claim that "theoretical diversity has been a strength in our movement" and "we believe debate is vital" (Beyond Resistance) (2), this does not include the threat of left communists intervening at their meetings.

Anarchism doesn’t have any independent history. Its eternal principles - liberty, equality, fraternity - originally borrowed from the bourgeoisie, recognise no historical context, and no grounding in the maturation of an historic class. It originally expresses the instability of the radical petit-bourgeoisie that looks uncertainly to an imaginary future, while harking back to a nostalgic golden age.

The history of the twentieth century shows that anarchism is quite capable of reconciling itself with the left wing of capital, but organically incapable of recognising the theoretical acquisitions of the workers’ movement that are defended by the marxists of the communist left. The AF tries to claim the KAPD as part of the heritage of anarchism. This attempt at misrepresenting the contribution of part of the communist left marks out the parasitism of the AF in relation to the revolutionary political organisations of the working class.

Anarchy:The piss poor excuse for totalitarians to fill a vacuum

Makes people feel kind of"leftout" when they take stock of the shit they`ve allowed into their brains eh?

But...you can be used
What is a marxist party like the German Communist Workers Party of the 1920s (the KAPD), a sympathising party of the Third International, doing on an anarchist family tree? "The positive legacy of the left/council communists must be their theoretical breakthroughs in their analysis of the Trade Unions and parliamentary democracy and in their understanding of the centrality of working class self-organisation in the revolutionary project." ('In the tradition, Part 1', Organise 52, Winter '99/'00)

We read this in a continuing history by an English anarchist group, the Anarchist Federation, which includes the Communist Left (1), amongst others, in an attempt to trace its roots. It may seem strange that anarchists, who, particularly over the last ten years, have been joining in the deafening media chorus that equates Stalinism with communism, and marxism with the gulag, are now finding marxists to identify with. But anarchist attempts to associate itself with marxism, or, claims to have married marxism with the eternal ideals of anarchism have been going on for the past 150 years of the workers movement. When Bakunin declared himself a disciple of Marx and the Ist International (before stabbing both in the back), he was not the last of an ignoble tradition.

More recently, with the current vogue for a ‘new revolutionary movement’, syntheses of anarchism and marxism are being proclaimed anew (see International Review 102 ‘Is it possible to reconcile anarchism and marxism?’) Some might say that we left communists should be grateful for these anarchist compliments to our political ancestors, and encourage reconciliation between all those who are against the capitalist system.

Without wanting to seem bad mannered, we don’t believe it is possible to defend the political positions and activity of left communism within an anarchist perspective.
http://forums.cannabisculture.com/forums...1&what=showflat